Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1887-10-12
THE NEW STATE BUILDING.
The Attorney General Decides that 1t
MAY Still be Erected.

The Attorney-General Decides that 1t
May Still be Erected.
Superintendent J. d. Young having rep
resented to Governor Waterman that there
is pressing need for the erection of the fire.
proof building for storage of school text
books and stock, for which the last Legisla-
ture made an appropriation of $4,000, State
Controller Dunn raised the question, Has
the appropriation lapsed, since it is pro-
vided in the Act that the building shall be
completed on or before July, 1887? The
Governor thereupon submitted the ques-
ton to the Attorney-General. The follow
ing correspondence is self-explanatory- OF
the result Of such submission
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT.
SACRAMENTO, Cal, October 10, 1887.
DEAR SIR: l am directed by the Governor TO
submit to you the question, whether or not the
care and security of the State series of school
text books, etc. approved March 10, 1887, can
still be used for that purpose.
N. D. B0RUCK, Private Secretary.
OFFICE OF THE ATToRNEY-GESEgALl
STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
SACRAMENTO, October II, 1887.
To His ErceHency, Governor WdteI,mdn-DEAR
SIR: Replying to your letter of inquiry through
your Private Secretary, | have to say that SO
mia approved March 10, 1884, in respect to the
erection OF fire proof warehouse for the stor-
age of the State series of textbooks as says that
the said building shall be completed on OF
before July, 1887 Is, in my opinion, directory,
and not Limitation of power. The sum of
$4,000 is appropriated by the Legislature for the
construction Of building which is specifically
described, and which is to be fre-proof This
Is the dominant idea which pervades the law.
Negative words are not added, such as anything
not done at any given time shall be null and
void.
In Dwarris on Statutes (Potter's edition., D.
223, note %, 1t is said Where statute directs
person to do a thing in certain time, without
any negative words restraining him from doing
it afterwards, the naming of the time will be
considered as directory to him, and not a limit
alton of his authority | do not consider the
terms here as of the essence of the thing re-
CURED, and this brings it within Lord Mans
fields rule, as to the question whether the stat
ute is mandatory or not. The time is stated in
the statute more as matter of convenience
than substance.
In the case of The People VS.. Allen.
Wendell. 4S7, the Court says; The general
rule is that when statute speci-
hes the time within which a public
ohicer is to perform an official act regarding
the rights and duties OF others. 1t will be con-
sidered directory merely, unless the nature of
the act to be performed, or the language used
by the Legislature shows that the designation
of the time was intended as limitation of the
power OF the officer" Mr.. Sedgwick, in his
work on the construction OF statutes, says; when
statutes direct certain proceedings to be done in
certain way or at q certain time, and q strict
compliance with these provisions of time and
form does not appear essential to the judicial
mind, the proceedings are held valid, though
the command of the statutes is disregarded
and disObeyed.' Mr. Smith in his work on the
same subject, says there is a distinction DE
tween cases where certain acts to be done are
of the essence of the thing required to be done
by the act, in which case. it is imperative; and
things which are not of the essence in the lat
ter case, it is merely directory, ETC."
Smith, in his Commentaries, Section go. re-
atfirms the quotation taken as above from Fot-
ters Dwarris on Statutes. / am of the opinion
therefore, that the appropriation can still be
used for the purpose. Very respectfully,
Il. A. JOHNSON, Attorney General.